The “Social Corp” idea does not make sense to me. I can see potential for it to be used buy neutral alts for the same benefits an NPC corp can provide with the current crime watch system. Why should groups have all the cool stuff like offices, hangers, shared fittings, shared bookmarks and wallets without exposing themselves to any risk? The biggest benefit I can see would be improving the UI around formal wars, improving documentation around the mechanics, and explaining the benefits and risks around organizing into corporations and alliances (maybe during the corp creation process).
But is one really free from any risks? … I’ll let you figure this one out.
2 Likes
No, Thera has NPC stations. I hate structure logistics. It almost made me quit having to fuel a ■■■■■■■ POS for years in a C2 and I don’t want that back.
I don’t think that is what they implement. I just hope there will be a switch so one can opt in to wardecs without a structure like the one for corp aggression.
White and Ira, You two are just like:
1 Like
Thera, makes sense then, I am not a fan of structure logistics myself, but you can just put up a cheap one in some godforsaken ara of Eve and get to it.
I hope that they allow you to ally in without a structure, however there is a value in structures, instant clone change is one example.
I would suggest that you should have a structure in hisec to war dec someone, but a structure anywhere in game allows you to be war decked. I also suggest that if you do not have a structure you can still ally in terms of the changes coming in December.
1 Like
If you wardec in high-sec then your structures should be in high-sec, hiding in J-space/Null or Low is the cowards way out. 
This discussion is about a bad game mechanic and as ive said to others, you can stand and stomp your feet and whine and spout tears all you want but CHANGE IS COMING, either keep up with the pouting or become part of the change and help steer its course but either way, change is coming, your personal ‘feelings’ not withstanding.
2 Likes
I do hope that the decision to become a real Corp and hold a structure implies that a major nerf will be applied to the NPC manufacturing, refining, and industrial capabilities.
Accepting the risks of a war declaration is a major risk that requires a major reward or nobody will do it.
Maybe without a structure you will not be able to manufacture profitably, or refine profitably, or gain standings sufficient to run missions as profitably, etc…
Wars are a substantial risk, I think we need to ensure those taking those risks receive a reward commensurate with their level of risk.
Then you turn friendly war dec on. 
Excuse me but that is already the case, you cannot compete using NPC stations.
So much this:
1 Like
Npc structures already got effectively nerfed. It’s not possible to be remotely competitive using them.
Now with this change what should happen is hs structures get a buff to equal or be much closer to null, since it will bring more risk on your heads as the wardec alliances will have a smaller pool to target
2 Likes
Last I remember it is illegal to target new players in new player systems. Sure you can, but you will get banned.
If you could it would of already been happening because the low end behavior of certain people in EvE knows no bottom.
Still illegal to do.
The proposal is stupid.
They could have focused on making certain corps and alliances “war decable” and by paying for a war dec what types of information is available to the parties involved. I sort of think about a null sec alliance declaring war on another null sec alliance and this brings up a special dashboard with very informative information. (same thing happens in high sec, i just drew on null sec because that is where the war dec mechanic is useless).
There are so many angles that a good war dec mechanic would open up but once again CCP are putting a band air on something that has been more useless than good.
Furthermore, CCP have a string of ignoring real issue’s to game play and when they actually put a focus on it it turns out to be completely bull crap. I and many others want something being done about high sec ganking but I fear we will once again either be ignored or they’ll bring something in so half arsed it’ll create more terrible game play.
1 Like
Sounds like a cake and eat it too thing
1 Like
I am not a fan of high sec ganking, but I don’t logically see it being removed ever.
The best thing you can do is fly a ship that’s not targeted as much and not carrying overly expensive items.
2 Likes
What is the problem with ganking? It is already so hard that bigger targets get shot only by 3 or so multiboxers… sure there is occasional idiot loading 2B into t1 industrials but that is rare. Did you ever try to assemble fleet of 20 destroyers with maxed out skills? That is why few ppl gank freighters and the ones who do it tend to be multiboxers.
1 Like
Ganging is awesome part of the game. Shows you nothing is safe and which makes the game goal to work together.
1 Like
If players stopped flying blingy ships gankers would find something else to complain about. The irony is that by constantly going after the low hanging fruit all they’re left with is more risk-averse players as targets.
It’s the same reason low-sec sucks. Players looking for actual PvP aren’t going to wade through gatecamp upon gatecamp - only to be set upon by entire corp once they’re pinned down.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.